2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2012.05.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SIR: Deterministic protein inference from peptides assigned to MS data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Protein inference is often complicated by the fact that many tryptic peptides are shared among proteins. Moreover, mass accuracy used for database-dependent search, the specific sequence database used for the search, the filtering criteria such as minimum number of peptides identified, and False Discovery Rate (FDR) cutoff can also dramatically change the proteins and peptides identified in the final report and can be a reason for lost information and low reproducibility when validation is performed in another laboratory that uses a different data analysis pipeline [43,44]. Besides protein inference, the protein state is another issue in bottom-up proteomics, which often does not provide accurate information on the site location of PTMs, and even if the site location is well determined the quantitative value cannot be directly linked to quantitative values of protein states [45].…”
Section: Proteomics-based Technologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Protein inference is often complicated by the fact that many tryptic peptides are shared among proteins. Moreover, mass accuracy used for database-dependent search, the specific sequence database used for the search, the filtering criteria such as minimum number of peptides identified, and False Discovery Rate (FDR) cutoff can also dramatically change the proteins and peptides identified in the final report and can be a reason for lost information and low reproducibility when validation is performed in another laboratory that uses a different data analysis pipeline [43,44]. Besides protein inference, the protein state is another issue in bottom-up proteomics, which often does not provide accurate information on the site location of PTMs, and even if the site location is well determined the quantitative value cannot be directly linked to quantitative values of protein states [45].…”
Section: Proteomics-based Technologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2B). Although others have proposed and implemented more nuanced levels of evidence groups (2,9,26,27), this simple three-tiered approach covers all possibilities and is easily interpretable. IDGroup is a PSM quality rank that combines the spectral match score with PSM q-values as described in gene-centric approach by gpGrouper and protein-centric approach by MaxQuant (without cross-species peptide elimination).…”
Section: Fig 1 Gene-centric Grouping Is a Robust Methods For Inferenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The FDR was set to 0.01 for peptide and protein identifications in both MaxQuant and mVEMS. Only proteins in evidence groups one to three, as defined by Matthiesen et al (37), were considered in subsequent quantitative analysis.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The database-dependent search of the MS/MS spectra from the nuclear, mitochondrial, and cytosolic crude fractions resulted in a set of 18,816 proteins using a 1% FDR cutoff. Of these, 17,745 proteins were placed in evidence groups one to three as defined by Matthiesen et al (37). Collapsing the proteins into the corresponding coding genes yielded 5181 proteins, 5065 of which were not common contaminants.…”
Section: Lymphocyte-derived Cell Lines Respond Differently Tomentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation